Cronus wrote::lol: What? People in London are negative?!! Who'da thunk it!.. I suppose that's one way of responding to having your own factually incorrect statement pointed out. Cronus wrote:Anyway, in breaking news, London isn't the centre of the world, petal... My goodness – I had never realised that! Thanks for the edumacation. Which, of course, is also why I don't remember claiming that it was. Cronus wrote:...Lots more patronising twaddle from a corporate bottom licker... The legacy will be 'what we make it", eh? So what's your contribution going to be then? There are 'ordinary' tourists staying away. There are theatres closing down for the duration (prices being slashed at hotels and theatres for exactly this reason). There are businesses told not to open (unless in the middle of the night). Deliveries to other businesses will have to take place pretty much at night too – hiking costs. One hilarious point is that you yourself seem determined to take the 'legacy' claims absolutely at face value. As opposed to others who remember things like this.

Cronus wrote::lol: What? People in London are negative?!! Who'da thunk it!.. I suppose that's one way of responding to having your own factually incorrect statement pointed out. Cronus wrote:Anyway, in breaking news, London isn't the centre of the world, petal... My goodness – I had never realised that! Thanks for the edumacation. Which, of course, is also why I don't remember claiming that it was. Cronus wrote:...Lots more patronising twaddle from a corporate bottom licker... The legacy will be 'what we make it", eh? So what's your contribution going to be then? There are 'ordinary' tourists staying away. There are theatres closing down for the duration (prices being slashed at hotels and theatres for exactly this reason). There are businesses told not to open (unless in the middle of the night). Deliveries to other businesses will have to take place pretty much at night too – hiking costs. One hilarious point is that you yourself seem determined to take the 'legacy' claims absolutely at face value. As opposed to others who remember things like this.

JerryChicken wrote:This, for instance http://www.guardian.co.uk/housing-network/2012/jul/19/olympic-legacy-social-housing-east-village sounds positive. Sounds positive, indeed. Unfortunately, it's a dimple in terms of what needs doing.

JerryChicken wrote:This, for instance http://www.guardian.co.uk/housing-network/2012/jul/19/olympic-legacy-social-housing-east-village sounds positive. Sounds positive, indeed. Unfortunately, it's a dimple in terms of what needs doing.

Mintball wrote:I suppose that's one way of responding to having your own factually incorrect statement pointed out. If you say so. Quote::shock: My goodness – I had never realised that! Thanks for the edumacation. Which, of course, is also why I don't remember claiming that it was. Perhaps not, but your claim was "I've yet to meet a single person in London who is cock-a-hoop", as though London is all that matters. However, as much a it might gall you, the overwhelmingly positive response and massive turnouts for the torch relay on a national level is a far better indicator of public opinion than your depressing whining. Quote:The legacy will be 'what we make it", eh? So what's your contribution going to be then? Probably as much as yours. Quote:There are 'ordinary' tourists staying away. There are theatres closing down for the duration (prices being slashed at hotels and theatres for exactly this reason). There are businesses told not to open (unless in the middle of the night). Deliveries to other businesses will have to take place pretty much at night too – hiking costs. Aw look, there she goes hunting for links again. Yes, ordinary tourists are staying away (and also business travellers - you missed that out). And wow, some things have changed to accommodate the disruption of the world's largest sporting event coming to town. Who would have expected there would be changes to the norm, some disruption, and not everyone would be happy! Shocking revelations there, well done you. Quote:One hilarious point is that you yourself seem determined to take the 'legacy' claims absolutely at face value. If that's hilarious I suggest you get out more. I'm not sure what you've been reading, but seeing as I've been saying ALL ALONG that anyone taking the legacy claims at face value is naive, I can only assume you're being your usual obtuse self. Quote:As opposed to others who remember things like this. Cuts to funding during a global recession, with the Olympics taking priority? Absolutely astounding.

Mintball wrote:I suppose that's one way of responding to having your own factually incorrect statement pointed out. If you say so. Quote::shock: My goodness – I had never realised that! Thanks for the edumacation. Which, of course, is also why I don't remember claiming that it was. Perhaps not, but your claim was "I've yet to meet a single person in London who is cock-a-hoop", as though London is all that matters. However, as much a it might gall you, the overwhelmingly positive response and massive turnouts for the torch relay on a national level is a far better indicator of public opinion than your depressing whining. Quote:The legacy will be 'what we make it", eh? So what's your contribution going to be then? Probably as much as yours. Quote:There are 'ordinary' tourists staying away. There are theatres closing down for the duration (prices being slashed at hotels and theatres for exactly this reason). There are businesses told not to open (unless in the middle of the night). Deliveries to other businesses will have to take place pretty much at night too – hiking costs. Aw look, there she goes hunting for links again. Yes, ordinary tourists are staying away (and also business travellers - you missed that out). And wow, some things have changed to accommodate the disruption of the world's largest sporting event coming to town. Who would have expected there would be changes to the norm, some disruption, and not everyone would be happy! Shocking revelations there, well done you. Quote:One hilarious point is that you yourself seem determined to take the 'legacy' claims absolutely at face value. If that's hilarious I suggest you get out more. I'm not sure what you've been reading, but seeing as I've been saying ALL ALONG that anyone taking the legacy claims at face value is naive, I can only assume you're being your usual obtuse self. Quote:As opposed to others who remember things like this. Cuts to funding during a global recession, with the Olympics taking priority? Absolutely astounding.

You wrote: "Meanwhile, the majority ..."

What you really meant was: 'the majority of people I have personally spoken to'. There is a difference.



In terms of the London Olympics ...



It was all the offers of free Cokes and free Samsung flags.



I haven't claimed that it'll be "what we make if". You have. So the question remains.



As opposed to you, who claimed you couldn't be bothered to look for anything to support your claims. I wonder why?



It's always amusing watching you try to squirm out of things being proved to you after your own dumb blanket assertions.



That's a really pisspoor attempted swerve even by your standards.

If the legacy is supposed to be at least partly about – according to you – getting more children active, then it doesn't actually help when schemes that do exactly that are cut. It's also an utterly false economy given rates of childhood obesity.

But then you seem to be suggesting that prioritising a sporting event is a good use of taxpayers' money over such things.

Yep, exactly the same as you.

But then actually the majority of public opinion I've seen has been the hundreds of thousands turning out to watch the torch relay. Not a few cynical journalists and internet "intelligentsia" (cough).


Of course, they rest of us aren't allowed an opinion then. London snobbery at its finest, my dear.


And you say I'm squirming? Got a real issue with sponsors, ain'tcha.


I realise it's easy for you to be obtuse, but it's also rather dull. 'We' is the UK, LOCOG, the athletes, the workers, the spectators, the press, etc, etc, etc. But you knew that.


I'm not utterly desperate to prove my position and don't find hunting for bad news fulfilling. Not in my personality you see, unlike some...


Always a "giggle" to see you trying to blow up every piece of negative news into an outrage. Even ones that will be over within a couple of weeks.


As the article says, most of the shortfall is being made up by National Lottery cash, and who's to say that funding wouldn't have been cut anyway? Bit of an economic crisis going on, in case you hadn't noticed. And is Sport England and Olympic funding directly linked or from entirely unrelated budgets?

Love it - the London Olympics will be responsible for child obesity. Deary me.

No. Not the same.

You made a sweeping statement.

I countered with a less sweeping statement – one that was specifically and clearly about responses from whomsoever I had personally encountered. However, it was a fairer indication of something than your sweeping statement about "the majority" , which then turns out to have been grounded in nothing more than 'people I have spoken to'.



Don't fret – you'll never be accused of being a member of any such latter group.



Nothing has been said to that effect. Your chip is showing.



Nope. I'm sponsoring a football team myself this coming season.

I have a "real issue" with what FA described very succinctly a few posts ago.



But not so dull that you don't keep returning for further punishment.



So what will your contribution be, as part of that "we"? Because if everyone says: "'We' is the UK, LOCOG, the athletes, the workers, the spectators, the press, etc, etc, etc" as a way of avoiding answering the question directly, there really will be no legacy of the variety you claim "we" will make.



What?

So the importance or otherwise of any story is based on how long it might be around?



Nobody is saying "funding wouldn't have been cut anyway". And yes, there is an economic crisis: one that is being increased by cuts and 'austerity'.



Who has claimed that in general? And here specifically?

Remember my rule on quotes? Neither the time nor the inclination.

I'll leave you now, wallowing unattractively in self-adulation, cynicism and negativity and looking down your considerable nose at the poor saps who clearly don't know any better.

Meanwhile, I'll not worry too much about a few cleaners bunking up together for a fortnight or a few people getting their wrists slapped for trying to cash in on the Olympic brand, and I'll drink a beer (contributing to the economy, you see) and enjoy an epic event taking place in the UK.

As for internet "intelligentsia" - you're welcome to each other.

Well, not now, anyway.

bye

Jesus, the day I'm approved of by you two sad cases is the day I give up.

Thanks for the replies, cheered me right up.